(Original post by Dragonfly07)
I think killing people due to discrimination is worse than killing people due to being a simple *******.

The reason for that is because discrimination stems from hate. Killing people out of pure enjoyment shows a lack of empathy which the person had no control over (the lack of empathy isn't due to hate - he'd do this to anyone).

That's why I hate Hitler more. The number of people they each killed is irrelevant.

The thing is, obviously both were totalitarian leaders, but Hitler takes the blame for a lot of brain childs of various colleagues....Adolf Eichmann designed the concentration camps. Hitler got the idea for using Zyklon B out of a book. He read simply masses on anti-Semitic train of thought and greatly admired people like Henry Ford. There was much more involved than just one man.
Whereas Stalin ruled by absolute fear and so changed the original idea without much interference, and twisted what could have been an unwieldy but non-evil experiment into something obviously v. evil, so that really was the product of just one man. Are we persecuted for our inspirations or our actions? It's not just about the amount of people killed, it's about how much original thought each produced.

Sorry- v. clumsily written....no more History revision for chinaberry..

(Original post by chinaberry)
The thing is, obviously both were totalitarian leaders, but Hitler takes the blame for a lot of brain childs of various colleagues....Adolf Eichmann designed the concentration camps. Hitler got the idea for using Zyklon B out of a book. He read simply masses on anti-Semitic train of thought and greatly admired people like Henry Ford. There was much more involved than just one man.
Whereas Stalin ruled by absolute fear and so changed the original idea without much interference, and twisted what could have been an unwieldy but non-evil experiment into something obviously v. evil, so that really was the product of just one man. Are we persecuted for our inspirations or our actions? It's not just about the amount of people killed, it's about how much original thought each produced.

Sorry- v. clumsily written....no more History revision for chinaberry..

The fact that there were factors involved in Hitler's course of action and thought is irrelevant. I agree to some extent, and you are right - Hitler was influenced by ideologies and theories presented to him by colleagues and material which he studied, however, the people who wrote such material did not act on it. Hitler became obsessed with the ideologies which he studied, developed them, and then actually implemented them into society.

The amount of people killed is a main factor in regards to who was worse - but essentially it boils down to the goals of each man, and what changes they wanted to bring to the world, along with their frame of mind. Hitler wanted to exterminate the people he deemed unworthy of living, have complete control over the world under a regime which would last 1000 years, have a master race, etc. And for that reason, Hitler is a more corrupt and worse a person than Stalin was.

P.S : I know that the third reich would not have lasted 1000 years, it probably wouldn't have even lasted 10, it was hypothetical, of course.

(Original post by chinaberry)
The thing is, obviously both were totalitarian leaders, but Hitler takes the blame for a lot of brain childs of various colleagues....Adolf Eichmann designed the concentration camps. Hitler got the idea for using Zyklon B out of a book. He read simply masses on anti-Semitic train of thought and greatly admired people like Henry Ford. There was much more involved than just one man.
Whereas Stalin ruled by absolute fear and so changed the original idea without much interference, and twisted what could have been an unwieldy but non-evil experiment into something obviously v. evil, so that really was the product of just one man. Are we persecuted for our inspirations or our actions? It's not just about the amount of people killed, it's about how much original thought each produced.

Sorry- v. clumsily written....no more History revision for chinaberry..

What about Mao? funny you've left out the biggest killer in history...i wonder why???

(Original post by Mr.Zen)
The fact that there were factors involved in Hitler's course of action and thought is irrelevant. I agree to some extent, and you are right - Hitler was influenced by ideologies and theories presented to him by colleagues and material which he studied, however, the people who wrote such material did not act on it. Hitler became obsessed with the ideologies which he studied, developed them, and then actually implemented them into society.

The amount of people killed is a main factor in regards to who was worse - but essentially it boils down to the goals of each man, and what changes they wanted to bring to the world, along with their frame of mind. Hitler wanted to exterminate the people he deemed unworthy of living, have complete control over the world under a regime which would last 1000 years, have a master race, etc. And for that reason, Hitler is a more corrupt and worse a person than Stalin was.

P.S : I know that the third reich would not have lasted 1000 years, it probably wouldn't have even lasted 10, it was hypothetical, of course.

Well- without looking at things too logically and stiffly- I beg to differ and all that....Hitler was insane! I think that what qualifies evil as such is most of all sanity. Never mind what is evil in essence, festering away independent of a "host"....context must always be valued.

(Original post by chinaberry)
There were some pretty ragingly anti-Semitic elements to Stalinism...the only time he let them be was as a propaganda exercise in 1941...look at the Doctor's Plot and everything after the war.

+1

Stalin had arguments with other members of the polituburo and accused them of failing to recognise their enemies until it was too late. The enemy he was referring to was the jews.

I've read biographies on both of them and I don't feel saying Hitler Vs Stalin is a fair question. It is much more accurate to speak in terms of Hitlerism or Stalinism. Hitler was unpleasant, but it was the people he was surrounded with that were much more brutal then Hitler (i.e. Himmler).

Bear in mind that Hitler wanted to exile the Jews in Germany to Madagascar.

With Stalin the extermination orders were much more personal and ruthless.

Hitler was surrounded by evil people, stalin was more evil....would be my final verdict.

(Original post by ClassQuick)
Stalin didnt actually kill more people than Hitler. His actual kill count was below one million. The kill count was highly exaggerated to justify the cold war in the eyes of the people.

Indirectly perhaps, but many historians (not just American historians...) blame his insistance on exporting grain and resources abroad and pouring it into the cities to fuel industrialiasion as the cause of Holodomor, which killed 7.5 million, compared to the Holocaust which is estimated at 6 million.

I'm not arguing the case of one being more evil than the other, but 'kill count' might not be the most consistant proof of evil :/

Stalin had arguments with other members of the polituburo and accused them of failing to recognise their enemies until it was too late. The enemy he was referring to was the jews.

I've read biographies on both of them and I don't feel saying Hitler Vs Stalin is a fair question. It is much more accurate to speak in terms of Hitlerism or Stalinism. Hitler was unpleasant, but it was the people he was surrounded with that were much more brutal then Hitler (i.e. Himmler).

Bear in mind that Hitler wanted to exile the Jews in Germany to Madagascar.

With Stalin the extermination orders were much more personal and ruthless.
Hitler was surrounded by evil people, stalin was more evil....would be my final verdict.

I'm sure Mao said something along the lines of: the death of one person is a tragedy, the death of one thousand is just a statistic